Top 5 Romances/Couples/Relationships in Sci-Fi!

About a week ago, I was asked by my friend Andrea (who runs things over at to come up with a top 5 list of sci-fi romances. I had some questions for her and decided to come up with just really memorable relationships in sci-fi, whether they be romantic or not. Although most are. Anyway, you can find Andrea’s list that she has provided on her site here! Be sure to check it out.

Here is mine:

5. Rose and Ten: These two perhaps never were romantic on screen. But man did they love one another. Their love was so strong that Rose tried to come back through the time rift to find the Doctor. But their love started the way all love stories start…an alien who looks like a human comes to Earth in a blue police box that is bigger on the inside and whisks a girl away and shows her the world. Rose is the skeptical girl who wants to believe there is so much out there, but has been let down so many times that she just no longer believes it. It is almost like Aladdin or something. Jasmine (Rose is not a princess, but forgive that) is jaded and along comes this dude who can fly her around the world.,.instant love. We get to know this alien, known as the Doctor, more and more and then one day, poof, he dies. But then, he comes back and is different and is hansom and funny and quirky and vengeful and all these things and Rose just falls for him. Now, that is nothing new. A lot of companions fall for the Doctor. But what makes this so special is that the Doctor fell for Rose! The problem is, when he finally realized his feelings, he was just a little too late and…well, she was gone. And the Doctor, as tragic as he is, had to move on and keep living without her.

Memorable moments: riding around on that scooter in the pink skirt, that last scene where he almost gets to say “I love you”

4. Wash and Zoe (Firefly): These two are far more silly. A perfect example of the Olive theory…two completely opposite people complimenting one another perfectly. Zoe is a battle hardened soldier, a veteran of the war, and a no non-sense type of officer. Her husband, Wash, is a clowning, laid back pilot who got the job mostly because no one else was available at the time. But he did have a long list of references. The two grew to love one another and were eventually married. They were the ‘classic’ love on the ship Serenity in Joss Whedon’s show Firefly. The two of them were brilliant together and fun to watch. The episode Wash question’s Zoe’s love for him over that of her Captain’s is still one of the best episodes that show had to offer. Zoe, of course, chose Wash in the end.

Memorable moments: the scene they first meet, Wash’s tragic death

3. Jim Raynor and Sarah Kerrigan (Starcraft): These two! With a love this complicated, and quite frankly, truly epic, how were they ever going to miss the list? A love that spans years and planets with bloodshed and war, somehow these two met up and fell in love. But that, my friends is just the start. Kerrigan was a ghost, a special forces agent who would go into hostile territory to scout and, if need be, nuke a planet. Raynor was a rebel, someone who was content minding his own. But then the war happened. And the Terran (human) race had to band together under the rule of Arcturus Mengsk. Mengsk betrayed Kerrigan, leaving her to die in a swarm of Zerg, an evil alien race. Joke was on him however, as his betrayal forced Raynor to leave the Terran dominion to find Kerrigan, who was now a human/zerg hybrid. Following with me so far?

Kerrigan goes on a rampage of revenge, doing all she can to destroy her enemies, chief among them, Mengsk. Her rage burns so hot that she basically kills off any rivals to her own army and then starts unleashing war on anyone in her way. Raynor tries to get through to her, and eventually, does find her. The thing is, despite the way she looks and the things she has done, Raynor still loves her. He loves her with all his heart and Kerrigan even loves him back. Which makes the last scene of the most recent game so heart breaking. Kerrigan finally, with the help of Raynor, gets her revenge on Mengsk. And just when you think Raynor and Kerrigan can finally settle down with one another, he looks at her and he knows she has to go. They can’t be together. At least not now, not the way the world is now. And he knows he has to let her go. And they both know they have to keep fighting so they CAN be together. A whole race of the universe will have to be wiped out first so these two can finally be with one another. That, my friends, is literally Epic.

Memorable scene: Kerrigan being overran, Raynor finding Kerrigan, Raynor letting her go.

(Nerdy tie in: The voice of Kerrigan is that of Tricia Helfer who plays Caprica 6 on Battlestar Galactica. Caprica 6 is on Andrea’s list making her the only person to have two different characters on our lists.)

2. Han Solo and Princess Leia (Star Wars): You know the only thing I have to bring up is this simple but powerful exchange:

“I love you.”

“I know.”

Wow. Be still my heart. Han the hansome rouge and Leia the warrior princess…these two had no business being together at all. But fate, or random events and choices, however you look at the world, brought them together. And, well, the rest is history. We all know this story, so just watch this and know that I am right on this one:

Memorable scenes: “Who’s scruffy looking?”, “Hold me.”

1. Admiral William Adama and President Laura Roslin: The slowest building relationship out of all of these, these two had to wait and wait and wait until they could not only admit their feelings, but until they would ALLOW themselves to feel these feelings. Adama was in charge of the safety of the fleet and every human left in existence  The President was in charge of making sure the human way of life was some what preserved and that we didn’t fall victim to killing ourselves. Those two tasks, given the fact that humans were continuously being chased down by robots trying to kill them, seemed like they would take up about 100% of your waking hours. But as there was starting to be some light at the end of the tunnel, these two relaxed a little bit and started to grow into one another. They even talked about finally finding Earth and building a small cabin together where they could live out their days. When Roslin was diagnosed with a terminal form of cancer, it was Adama who came down to read to her. And it was Adama who waited for her in a raptor by himself with no guarantee she would ever show up. These two were so damn heart warming and heart wrenching. Two people that started off as adversaries jockeying for control of the last remaining humans, figuring out the strengths and weaknesses of one another, then starting to grow together and finally starting to love one another. It was a beautiful thing to watch unfold on screen. Finally, as Roslin passes away, we see Adama content in life and start work on his cabin he promised her. Ugh, my heart.

Memorable moments: These two dancing at colonial day, Adama waiting in the raptor, Adama introducing Roslin to a thunderous applause.

Remember, your trip through space relationships is not done yet! Punch it over to the deflector dish to see more love among the stars!


Duel-List: Dodger Stadium!


Today, we take a look at two sides of one argument…is Dodger Stadium a good place or a bad place to go? We have friend of the site Nic Thorson here to help out today. He will be taking the reason Dodger Stadium stinks, and by virtue of that, I am tasked with defending it. So, let us get to the lists. Here is Nic’s:

Before my list, I want to start by saying that I actually like the Dodgers.  I like Dodger Stadium – the stadium part.  It’s a simplified, classic venue for America’s pastime on a huge scale.  Even though it’s the third oldest in MLB, and boasts a capacity of 57,000, making it the largest in the world, there’s not a bad seat in the house.  That being said… I don’t really like going there all that much.  Here’s why.

5.  It is unbearably hot during day games.  That’s to be expected given the climate.  The problem is, the beautiful open-air stadium on the side of a mountain, with all its scenic glory, has is no shade anywhere in the early afternoon.  You need a break from the sun?  Have fun watching the monitors over by the Dodger Dog stand.  Oh, and as long as I’m on the topic – Dodger Dogs are just hot dogs, and not even good ones.

4.  People need to stop throwing shit!  This stadium can really do the wave well… possibly better than anywhere. Maybe that’s why people feel the need to bring their “99 Cent Store Only” beach balls to every game.  As Jeff can attest to, this is a real bad idea when there are nacho cheese containers and giant-sized Diet Pepsi cups all over the place. (editors note: the one time I tried to keep a beach ball in play, i swatted it right into the chest of an old woman who JUST sat down with a brand new plate of nachos and a super large diet pepsi. Spilled all over her. I felt terrible. moving on…)

Paper airplanes are the new fan-favorite distraction.  These things are flying all over the place! One nearly made it to the pitchers mound during the last game I attended.  Most of them tend to just dive-bomb people in the next section.  How rude!  What it comes down to is this: you are either an adult throwing crap around, or you are an adult allowing a child to throw crap around… STOP!  How is this in any way appropriate public behavior?

3.  There are celebrity endorsements at every game.  Clearly, no one listens to Haley Duff tell people not to throw crap onto the field anyway!  I get that Universal has a big money in Dodger stadium, but do I really need to see a three-minute clip of “Field of Dreams” or the dance sequence from “The Breakfast Club” at every game?  The whole thing has a minor-league feel on a major-league budget.  And when it comes down to it, I’d rather see Dennis Haskins shoot a brat gun at a Double A game than see another trailer for “The Hangover 3”. Does any of this add to the experience of the game?  Is anyone here to watch baseball?  More on that later.

2.  “The other team sucks” chants.  Really, it’s the attitude of the fans.  OK, call me biased because I am rooting for a visiting team 3 games out of the year, but I also hate it when the chant goes out to teams I could care less about.  There’s no reason for hostility towards other fans, especially when you are so short-sighted to base your arrogance on one game, when in recent years, your team kinda sucks.

The attitude of the stadium is so bad, it has proven to be dangerous.  Years ago, a man was beaten within an inch of his life for wearing the wrong jersey in the parking lot.  Security was stepped up, but then another similar incident happened.  You can say these are isolated incidents, but I have been physically threatened at a game.  I have been pushed and grabbed.  I’ve had food thrown at me.

1.  Pretty much all of the above can be seen as effects of the one biggest problem… Dodger Stadium is in Los Angeles.  Angelinos don’t know a lot of… stuff.  80% of the crowd don’t know much about baseball and really don’t care.  The stadium is packed for giveaway days, but never before the third inning.  I rarely meet a Dodger fan that knows more about their own team than I do.

Now, I’m not going to rag on casual or fair weather fans.  They deserve as much enjoyment out of the game as anyone else and may eventually grow into diehards.  The problem is, when they gather is such high proportions, there is no one to offer an example of the code of conduct at a game.  And in LA, public behavior usually boils down to every person wanting to be the center of attention.  In turn, it is far less enjoyable for people who go to the stadium to watch baseball.

Nice list dude. I have the tall task now of defending Dodger Stadium. So here it goes:

5. Accessibility: Something that is quite simple. but should not be overlooked. This ball park is in it’s own little area in the metropolis of LA. It has parking enough for the whole stadium, and you can even park just outside and walk in. Since Magic Johnson and his group of business men took over, the parking cost has even gone down. All this means is that it is easy to get to and from the game. Have you ever tried to get to a ball park in the middle of a city? Parking costs are sky high, the metro or lightrails are packed full or people, and everyone is just pissed off. Not so much here. You can get in and out of Dodger stadium with ease.

4. The stadium is huge: The bowl itself is super large. What that means is cheap tickets! You can get up and go to a Dodgers game and experience a wonderful baseball game for as little as $2! Now, you might be thinking, “Those are for the bad seats”…well just wait until point number 2 on this list. Another bonus of the stadium being so large is that it has a rather laid back feel to it. There is room to put things. Your knees aren’t in your chest the entire time. If a fat person is sitting right next to you, he isn’t rolling over into your lap. It is a comfortable place to sit and enjoy the game.

3. All you can eat: This is the money section. For about $30, you can get a ticket in the outfield All-You-Can-Eat pavilion where, well, you can gorge yourself on as much food as you want. Hot dogs, peanuts, nachos, popcorn…it’s all there and you can literally just help yourself in a cafeteria line style setting. With prices being as high as they are, usually one trip to the food stand more than justifies the $30 price of admission…but one more trip and you are already getting value on your investment. And, if you are like my friends, that second trip will never be your last. Load up on hot dogs baby!

2. Not a bad seat in the house: There truly is not a bad seat in the house as far as viewing the game goes. There are no poles to contend with. There are no weird discount seats where you are facing the wrong way for some reason. The design of the stadium allows for you to feel close to the field regardless of where you are sitting. The view is always good. Even in the upper most seats, you are not on top of someone trying to look over them to see the field. This is a stadium that is sprawled out over a large area, not crammed into a small city block or built like a cylinder so a roof can fit on it. Nic mentions the weather as an issue…well, that only seems to play during day games. During evening games, the weather is so nice, cool and temperate. The whole “romantic” image of a baseball game can be felt anywhere in Dodger stadium.

1. Theme nights: Dodger Stadium has some great theme nights. Star Trek, support of the Iraq veterans, Bark and the park, but of course, the best one, STAR WARS NIGHT! People dressing up as Star Wars characters, all you can eat food (see number 2) and Chewbacca throwing out the opening pitch! The  Dodger Stadium theme nights are a blast. I personally cannot wait to get back there again for one of these nights. Also, during the last Star Wars night, I got Jay Bruce to acknowledge my presence. I then traded for him in Fantasy and he helped me make the playoffs. Thanks buddy.

Alright, so there is the argument…Here is the question that needs answering…DO YOU LIKE DODGER STADIUM AS A SPORTS VENUE??


This is an article that can be found here. It was sent to me by my cousin who currently works in the craft brewing industry and it is a very cool read. Pour yourself some sort of beer, hopefully a Wee-Heavy if you can find one, and enjoy!


It’s a glorious era for the American beer drinker. We’ve got talented and passionated brewers making stellar beers in every single state across the country, an IPA revolution that’s brought us hops we didn’t even know existed, and a community that’s spilled over beyond our borders to inspire folks in countries as far-flung as Norway and Japan. Sometimes you have to pinch yourself to remember that 20 years ago, the landscape was a whole lot different, with just a few brave breweries on the front lines struggling to convert the first wave of craft-beer fanatics.

But just because times are swell doesn’t mean everything’s all good. The industry is at a cross-roads, ushering in the third-wave of craft brewers and drinkers while shaking off its image as a mere underdog. As tap and shelf space becomes more competitive than ever, breweries have to balance their “we’re all in this together” camaraderie with a survival instinct that doesn’t always mean playing fair. And as the age of bigger-means-better extreme brewing plateaus (this means of differentiation from mass-market beers eventually became the prevailing attitude in the business), craft-brew fans are forced to reconsider what they really want from their beers, and to call BS on gimmicks that don’t deliver.

So, just as we’ve done with kale and sketchy fish, we decided it was time to open up a conversation about some big issues in the beer world that too often get swept under the rug. Do we believe in all of these statements 100%? No—as you’ll notice, some of them are even at odds with one another. But these are topics that tend to come up with brewers, publicans, and fellow beer lovers once a few pints go down the hatch and taboos go out the window.

Good beer and honest conversation have always been fine bedfellows, so let’s talk, shall we?



Building a production brewery is an insanely expensive undertaking. The costs for equipment, space, and licensing can easily top $1 million before the first sack of grain is ever ordered. To keep costs down, some fledgling brewing professionals launch small-scale nanobreweries. But that’s backbreaking work for barely any profit. In lieu of investing in infrastructure, countless craft breweries resort to contract brewing.

For example, Brooklyn Brewery outsources many of its core beers to upstate New York, and San Francisco’s 21st Amendment brews and cans its ales in Minnesota. On the surface, there is nothing wrong with contract brewing. It’s a way for breweries, both new and established, to meet consumer demand. Done properly with oversight and careful attention to recipe formulation, you’d never tell them difference between contract-brewed beer and ales crafted on a brewery’s personal system. However, is it still local beer if it’s brewed hundreds of miles, if not a half dozen states away? (Not to mention that the grains and hops were probably flown in from Germany and New Zealand and who knows where else, but that’s a different debate altogether.)

There’s a stigma surrounding contract brewing due to the us-versus-them divide between craft brewers and big boys such as MillerCoors and Anheuser-Busch InBev, or whatever these international conglomerates now call themselves. Craft brewing is portrayed as more homespun, with recognizable faces behind the brew kettle. Mega-brewing evokes images of glazed-eye automatons pushing buttons on massive, gleaming machines. When you eliminate craft brewing’s folksy, hands-on image, consumers get angry—even if the beer still tastes terrific.

And for the record, just because a beer is locally brewed does not ensure it will be delicious. Some really nice people—people who lovingly craft their beers one barrel at a time—have poured some of the worst ales we’ve ever sipped.


One key to the third wave of the craft-beer revolution is the Internet. With the web, beer lovers from coast to coast—and around the globe—have a direct information pipeline to the latest brews to hit shelves and tap lines. From new nanobreweries to Sam Adams, no tidbit is deemed too small for the thirsty hordes on Twitter and Facebook. Disproportionately, though, the breathless coverage centers on white whales: the rare brews that crown rating websites such as Beer Advocate and Rate Beer. Did you hear that Three Floyds is releasing a barrel-aged Dark Lord vertical? When will that one-off Cantillon come to America? Man, Hill Farmstead is only debuting its latest spontaneously fermented ale at the brewery!

For many drinkers, the endless hype conditions a drooling, Pavlovian response: I must have this beer, no matter what it costs. In much of the same way that 1990s indie rockers collected seven-inch records or kids once acquired baseball cards, beer geeks will stop at nothing to nab the Alchemist’s Heady Topper, the Bruery’s Black Tuesday, or maybe Hair of the Dog’s Dave. Obtaining these cultish brews becomes a badge of honor, a checkmark on a list that, to be honest, doesn’t amount to a hill of beans. There are nearly 2,500 breweries in the country, many of which are making marvelous beer. The endless hunt for limited-release obscurities defeats the purpose of drinking: to share a pint and, more importantly, conversation with friends, both new and old. Stop mimicking Captain Ahab and his white-whale hunt. There’s plenty of great beer found in your backyard. You just have to log offline to find it.


While craft brewers will never have the immense marketing budgets of Bud, Miller, and Coors, it’s clear that some of the larger ones have started to take pages from their playbook. Accusations of “pay-for-play”—essentially, a payout in cash or trade for a brewery to get their beer is on tap at a bar, or placed prominently in a package store—have surfaced in the craft beer industry (Stone’s Greg Koch called out fellow brewers earlier this month). At a talk this month, a Chicago distributor acknowledged that pay-to-play is alive and well in that city, and will be until craft beer achieves a big enough market share to compete on an equal playing field with big beer. Other evidence of craft-beer taking cues from the Bigs includes the rash of disputes over similarly named beers.

Let’s be honest: Passion doesn’t pay the bills, and a more competitive landscape isn’t necessarily a bad thing—it would be naive to think that craft brewers don’t need to push their products and protect their trademarks as much as any other small business owner. But it’s a slippery slope from competitive to cut-throat. Part of the appeal of the craft-beer industry since its inception has been the grassroots, a-rising-tide-lifts-all-boats mentality that truly makes it feel like a community. But with tens of thousands of American craft beers in the market, could the era of Collaboration, Not Litigation be over?


The Brewers Association got into a row with Big Beer last December when they released a list of “crafty” breweries—American breweries that mislead consumers into thinking that they are “craft” without satisfying the BA’s definition. But while we’d agree that Blue Moon is not a craft beer, the fact remains that BA’s definition is flawed in that it has less to do with how beer is brewed and more to do with where the organization decided to draw their line in the sand—i.e., a “craft brewery” must produce less than six million barrels a year and be independently-owned. Does volume matter that much? In its true sense, the word craft has nothing to do with size or ownership; it’s about process. Sure, by their definition, Shock Top isn’t craft, but neither is Kona, Magic Hat, or Widmer. There may be a time when we can refer to everything as “beer” without a modifier, but why exclude those breweries that are opening people’s minds to quality beer for the first time?



We love beer festivals as much as the next red-blooded, beer-swilling American. They’re a great way to spend the afternoon with friends, sampling unusual ales and lagers and educating our palates on a constellation of craft beer flavors—or at least that’s supposed to be the point. In reality, beer festivals are an overpriced, all-you-can-drink buffet for getting blotto.

Much of the blame can be placed on ticket cost. With prices topping $70, $80, or $100 for a four-hour session, attendees want to ensure that they consume their admission fee in liquid form. And the liquids they are drinking are, by and large, nothing special. At most fests, distributors roll out breweries’ flagship brands. That means plenty of Stone IPA, Oskar Blues Dale’s Pale Ale, Brooklyn Brewery Lager, and other delicious, if commonplace, beers served by volunteers who don’t know two bits about the brands.

Of course, there are exceptions. Shelton Brothers and 12 Percent Imports put on the exemplary Festival, which offers some of the world’s rarest beers served by the brewers themselves. Or Beer Advocate’s incredibly well-curated Extreme Beer Fest and the Firestone Walker Invitational Beer Fest. Yes, these tickets are pricey, but we’d happily pay a premium for quality beer—and not just endless access to brews found in the supermarket cooler.


Yes, we all use Beer Advocate and RateBeer constantly to get the specs on beers, find out what styles different breweries are making, discover good bars in totally obscure locales, and so much more. And yes, we all respect the pivotal role that the Alström Brothers have played in fostering a nationwide community of likeminded beer lovers united by their passion for hops and malts.

But has that likeminded part gotten out of control? These sites have spawned a legions of militant beer geeks who all talk the same, all lionize the same beers, and all obsess over high ABVs and extreme hops. Let’s be honest: The user-generated scores and commentary below each beer on Beer Advocate are nothing more than nerdier, more niche Yelp reviews. They can certainly be helpful when you’re trying to get a sense of what a beer might taste like and whether it’s worth your effort to seek out, but the herd mentality can be dangerous.

Look at the top-rated beers on the site: Of the first 20 on the list, 13 weigh in at 10% ABV or over. And last year on RateBeer, Hill Farmstead had eight of the top 10 new beers of the year. We agree that the brews Shaun Hill is making up in Vermont are stellar (Abner is on our list of list of IPAs to try before you die), but there’s a clear hype factor at play when opinion becomes so homogenous.

We’ve seen what the tyranny of wine rating scores did in that world. Sure, these beer ratings are democratic in their current formulation, but they are also creating drones who prattle on about lacing and ethanols and treat you like a moron if you don’t say that Pliny the Elder is a work of staggering genius. Here’s hoping for more free-thinking among beer drinkers—stepping away from the laptop and into a barroom is a good place to start.


The last three decades has seen craft brewers travel to the distant fringes of fermentation, dosing IPAs with double, or even triple, the standard amount of hops; inoculating ales with funky wild yeasts; aging stouts in bourbon barrels; and reviving forgotten styles such as Germany’s tangy Berliner Weisse. Risk-taking is the heart of modern craft brewing. Without experimentation, we’d be stuck with too many lagers that, according to the old saw, are like having sex in a canoe: fucking close to water.

And while brewers have not lost their flair for the odd and the new (yup, that’s really algae, bull testicles, and a smoked pig head in those beers), too many are merely copying successful innovations. When Belgian-style saisons and black IPAs (or Cascadian dark ales, if provincialism floats your boat) started cropping up, they seemed thrillingly novel. Now, they’re as commonplace as Coors. Heck, imperial IPAs are a dime a dozen, and barrel-aging stouts has become a cliché. In every industry, success breeds imitations. It’s just all the more apparent in craft brewing, where draft lines are clogged with copycats following the status quo.

On that note: Don’t act surprised when you see session IPAs on every tap list this spring and summer.



When you order a Pinot Noir or a Chablis, you have a vague sense of what you’re in for, even if you’re not familiar with the producer or the vintage. But these days, going to a beer bar and ordering an IPA is a complete crap shoot. It’s not only that there are more hops varietals than ever, not to mention spinoff categories like rye IPAs and black IPAs (is it a porter with more hops?) and white IPAs (is it a wheat beer with more hops?), but also that process and ingredients themselves can be so vastly different that it’s anyone’s guess what the beer will taste like. The Beer Judge Certification Program (BJCP) hasguidelines, and it gives out style-based awards based on those guidelines, but they’ve been pushed and prodded and stretched to the degree that they are often too distorted to be useful.

On the one hand, this phenomenon can be seen in a positive light, as it provides further evidence of the runaway creativity of American craft brewers. Beer-style classifications are a relatively new phenomenon in the first place, popularized by beer writer Michael Jackson’s seminal The World Guide to Beer in 1977, and it appears that nomenclature has failed to keep pace with the experimental exuberance of today’s beer makers. Where it becomes a problem, however, is when it corrodes the foundation upon which beers are built and exposes brewers who feel liberated to go completely rogue before they’ve truly grasped the fundamentals of the styles that they are meant to be riffing upon. As the old saying goes, rules are made to be broken—but you need to know the rules first.

Why does this matter? We’ll leave that question to a man far more eloquent than us—Brooklyn Brewery brewmaster Garrett Oliver, who had this to say toTime Out NY when he published the Oxford Companion to Beer:

 I wrote a piece in the book about beer styles in which I basically try to [compare] an India Pale Ale with a hollandaise sauce. Two hundred years from the time of [the creation of] hollandaise sauce, somebody can say to a [cook] in the kitchen, “I need to make some hollandaise sauce,” and they know what to do. There may be some tiny differences, but it is a word that has actual meaning [because it’s been ingrained in a shared language]. That’s what makes the French way of doing things in the kitchen so amazingly powerful—the words always mean the same thing. What we’re doing here is laying that foundation [for beer]. People will call you a beer Nazi [when you set up strict parameters for beer styles]. But I don’t think a nomenclature is something that shuts you down or ruins your creativity.


Despite our quibbles with it from time to time, we’ve got love for the Grey Lady and appreciate that it puts out some great booze coverage. For wine, there’s the estimable Eric Asimov, weighing in on up-and-coming regions and must-try vintages. For cocktails, the ever in-the-know Robert Simonson, delivering timely news on intriguing spirits and game-changing bartenders. And for beer…pretty much Eric Asimov again, who once in a while will hold a seemingly random themed beer tasting with Flo Fab and some NYC beer pros, like “porters for spring.”

Don’t get us wrong—that’s not a knock on Asimov, who clearly has a tremendous palate. Shouts to him for even caring about craft beer. But it’s clear that saisons will never get him as fired up as Sancerre, so let’s get someone else in the hot seat. Craft beer has arrived. It is no longer a novelty. Time for the Times to saddle up and give it the respect it deserves in print, rather than writing painfully anachronistic stories about, say, how large-format beer bottles are trending.

But let’s not pick on the Times. The problem of beer coverage flailing embarrassingly behind the industry (and the consumer, for that matter) is pervasive across most media. The Wall Street Journal has a bonafide beer critic in William Bostwick, and it does some genuine front-line reporting from time to time. But it’s a shame that as craft beer evolves into new terrain, so much of the coverage that reaches people is still stuck in the “hey, look at these crazy brewers making these crazy beers!” mold. Beer coverage is all but nonexistent on major food blogs like Eater and Grubstreet, and stories in national rags likeEsquire (which employs perhaps the world’s finest spirits writer in David Wondrich) and GQ is too often tepid and noncritical.

We’ve heard several brewers complain, off the record, about the ham-fisted coverage they receive. As media, we need to catch up to the industry and tell better stories about beer.


There’s no doubt that beer is a democratizing beverage. Go to a corner bar, plunk down $5 or $6, and you can receive a world-class beer. Spend the same for wine or a cocktail and you’ll receive bottom-shelf plonk that’ll strip away your sobriety and stomach lining with equal speed. The price point allows a vast cross-section of polite (and impolite) society to embrace the bitter pleasures of craft beer, from sweatpants-wearing college students to Fortune500 CEOs. Beer’s keg-standing, tailgating, bro-down stereotype is disappearing as quickly as a fresh keg of Russian River’s Pliny the Younger.

While certain stereotypes are being destroyed, others are increasingly perpetuated: namely, brewers are mainly white. Sure, brewers boast beards of every conceivable style (lumberjack, dandy, goateed biker, etc.), and women are increasingly commandeering brew kettle, but that does not create diversity. Outside of Brooklyn Brewery brewmaster Garrett Oliver, there’s a glaring lack of racial integration in the upper echelon of craft brewing. (And Barack Obama making a White House beer does not count.) Today, there are beers of every conceivable flavor and color. It’s a shame that brewers are such a uniform hue.


Common sense dictates that if you want to get lit fast, you take a shot or drink a cocktail. But with high-alcohol beers more popular than ever with the beer-drinking public, it’s not clear that all drinkers understand that a single 15%-ABV imperial stout or two pints of a 7% IPA are equivalent to four bottles of Bud Light. Loyalists preach that craft beer drinkers “respect beer” and drink responsibly, but it’s hard to maintain composure when so many high-octane beers are being served. An even scarier thought: Are these same drinkers getting behind the wheel—sometimes unknowingly—when they shouldn’t? The “Big Three” spend a portion of their big marketing budgets preaching responsible drinking. Just because their consumers don’t have joe-schmoe tastes doesn’t absolve craft brewers from encouraging the same.


The Great American Beer Festival used to be a celebration of the nation’s best craft beer, period. While the West Coast has brewed much of that beer for a generation, these days excellent lagers and ales are coming from both coasts, and all points in between. The problem is, talented East Coast breweries have chosen to stay home from the Denver-based festival. After all, a majority of the festival’s 50,000 attendees come from Colorado and West. If a brewery has no intention of distributing beer out West, why spend thousands of dollars to send kegs, equipment, and manpower to Denver? Sure, the medals are nice to brag about, but they probably won’t do much to help a brewer keep pace with his or her real competition across town.


It’s impossible to miss the enormous international influence of the American craft brewers. Go to bars around the world, and you’ll find telltale signs that the gospel of hop bombs and barrel-aged stouts has spread. The excitement and creativity that these brewers have brought to beer is a great thing: It’s encouraging Brits to shake up the homogeneity of pub tap lines; it’s helping to inspire new generations of brewers in places where beer has a fusty, old-fashioned image; and it’s trailblazing a path for countries without a storied brewing history, like Denmark and Italy, to jump into the fray. Truly, it’s amazing what our craft brewers have achieved in the past few decades alone.

But you know what else is amazing? That Germany’s Weihenstephan has been making beer for nearly 1,000 years. Or that Belgian brewers figured out how to tame wild yeasts and use them to create funky sours without any labs or newfangled equipment, and the English created the first IPAs more than 300 years ago. Americans have a bad habit of ignoring history, and nowhere is that more apparent than in the beer world, where drinkers sneer at English ales for being “weak” and “boring,” or claim to have “invented” the black IPA without really appreciating its predecessors. It’s no wonder that some Europeans bristle at our beer culture, even if they might otherwise enjoy the beers that emerge from it.

Ultimately, the American craft-beer movement needs a slight attitude adjustment. Let’s be humble ambassadors of good beer, not hops-slinging cowboys with no appreciation for the traditions that made it all possible.


A common refrain from longtime brewers is that they “weathered the storm of the 1990s.” There were many factors that caused the craft beer bubble to burst then, but one of them was a decline in overall craft beer quality due to a an influx of new, inexperienced brewers who were in it for the money, not the love of beer. As the industry continues to grow, these fears have not faded—indeed, those same established brewers weren’t surprised when the main focus of New Belgium founder Kim Jordan’s speech at last month’s Craft Brewers Conference was the need to maintain beer quality. With a growing number of ambitious homebrewers at the helm of small upstarts, will quality decline? Perhaps, but there are far more people today that have been honing their homebrewing skills for a decade or more than there were back in the ’90s. Of course, the more the market grows, the higher the risk of charlatans getting into the game looking to market a gimmick rather than make great beer.


Experimentation is at the heart of the craft-beer movement, and it’s the catalyst for all the delicious oddities we enjoy, like wine-beer hybrids from Dogfish Head, saisons dosed with foraged flowers, and brews laced with peanut butter. But there’s a difference between focused boundary-pushing and lack of discipline. As more and more zealous homebrewers go pro, they bring with them a tendency to let their imaginations run wild. It’s not uncommon to see a new upstart hit the market with an Imperial IPA, a saison, a black IPA, a spiced wheat beer, a gose, and a handful of other styles. Can they really all be expected to taste good?

Not to play favorites (okay fine, let’s play favorites), but a brewery like Barrier manages to pull this trick off pretty impressively, barely ever brewing the same recipe twice yet almost always delivering something balanced and tasty. But the vast majority of breweries could stand to narrow their efforts a bit. There’s a reason why beers like Anchor Steam, Orval, and London Pride are so great—the brewers have not spread themselves too thin, instead focusing on perfecting one style or a handful of styles. So, rather than filling taps with their addled experiments, more brewers should think about quality control and creating a legacy. Of course, the fickleness of craft-beer drinkers doesn’t help matters—even when you make a brew as excellent as Sierra Nevada Pale Ale, people will follow move on in search of the next big thing. Still, with so much competition, we’d argue that crafting a small set of A+ products trumps flooding the market with B-minuses.

Written by Joshua M. Bernstein (@JoshMBernstein), Chris O’Leary (@brew_york), and Chris Schonberger (@cschonberger)

8 Dark Theories About Children’s Movies and TV Shows!

by Will Stephen on April 23, 2013,

8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


1. Willy Wonka is a cannibalistic murderer.


Granted: Wonka is a total creep, if not a psychopath. But some on the internet think that in the world of Wonka’s chocolate factory, a secret candy recipe + shockingly easy child injury and possible death (i.e. the Augustus Gloop-sucking tube) = kid-candy. Wouldn’t that make it taste a bit funky? Thick? Stringy? Regardless, the argument loses some credibility around the point this FanTheories Wiki editor says he’s “not trying to be racist here [about Oompa Loompas], but cannibalism in Africa isn’t the rarest of things.” Sounds to me like he’s just using his pure, bigoted imagination.


8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


2. Totoro is the God of Death.


Hayao Miyazaki is known for his beautiful, sprawling animated films that wrestle with some pretty hefty topics. And in kids movies that deal with spirit worlds and what not, it makes sense that the idea of mortality might lurk somewhere in the background. But HOLY SHIT, THE GOD OFDEATH?! The idea here is that when Mei goes missing, she actually drowns. And since Totoro helps Satsuki find Mei, he is thus a gatekeeper to the realm of the dead. Therefore anyone who can see him is actually on the verge of receiving his wrath. But… they also find Mei at the end. And everything’s OK. AND Totoro then makes a tree grow really big really fast. Last time I checked, trees tend to be a pretty common symbol of life. Which makes him a pretty terribleGOD OF DEATH. Look, not everything has to be a reflection of our universal fear of mortality. So can we all just cool it? Let us ENJOY the goddamn movie. And go to therapy.


8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


3. Toy Story 3 is about the Holocaust.


Don’t get me wrong, I cried like a baby in this movie. I wanted everything to be OK just like everyone else in the theater. The film’s got stakes! Pretty high stakes at that. And yes, the film’s parallels with the Holocaust are eerie to say the least. The toys are all gathered up and taken away, they hide in an attic, they face possible death in a furnace, they are saved after finding a new homeland, etc., etc. These are all images that conjure up intense, horrific historical memories for a lot of people. But it is hard to imagine the Toy Story team at Pixar gathered around a table, firmly deciding that the third movie in this trilogy of films for children — not the first, not the second — would be the appropriate time to finally tackle one of the most horrible genocides in history. Plus the movie has a happy ending. And spoiler alert: the Holocaust didn’t.

8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


4. Chewbacca and R2D2 were traitors.


I kind of wanted to include this as a treat to myself, just to imagine the spike in blood pressure from nerds once again seeing Star Wars labeled as a kids movie. Which it is. Am I kidding? Do you have toys? I digress. Some dopes out there find it hard to accept that maybe some stories are just… pretty straightforward. In their mind, R2D2 is a spy who avoids getting his memory deleted and purposefully manipulates everyone around him to avoid getting captured and help the Rebels. He often does so by communicating with “fellow super spy” Chewbacca, who uses stupid ol’ Han Solo, a mere puppet of a pilot, to do his every nefarious bidding. Let’s slow down for a second. Star Wars is pretty much the oldest tale in the book, a prototypical hero’s journey. There are good guys and there are bad guys. There are some twists and turns, of course, but this is not Dostoevsky. Chewy is a big furry thing, R2D2 is a little beepy thing. They do stuff, kids enjoy them, shut up.


8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


5. Spongebob and his friends are all mutants.


Homie lives in a pineapple under the sea. Shit is weird to begin with. So I could see an argument like this actually working for me. The characters are certainly lovable oddballs at the very least. And this theory interprets their weirdness as a literal, biological phenomenon (i.e. Bikini Bottom stands in for Bikini Atoll, a real nuclear testing site which would have caused genetic mutations in surrounding wildlife). But “truthnotes” loses me right around when he posits that “the residents of bikini bottom [sic] are retarded son of a bitch fish.” They might all be weirdo sealife rejects, yes, but I’m not so sure the Krusty Krab actually serves hamburgers because they “rip of [sic] people genitalia [sic], fry it, put some cheese on it and eat it.” But maybe that’s just me.


8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


6. Donald Duck suffers from PTSD.


This theory imagines a world in which Donald Duck’s erratic behavior (nightmares, temper tantrums, etc.) is a result of trauma experienced during the Duck’s military service. Now, it is important to note that it is indeed within canon that Donald Duck served as a paratrooper and commando in World War II. It is also important to note that Donald Duck is a fucking cartoon character. Those crazy things he does? The “difficulty falling or staying asleep” and what not? Yeah, that’s supposed to make kids laugh. Are they supposed to sit there and watch him go through a couple REM cycles for a good eight hours? Plus, the logic behind his “persistent avoidance of stimuli associated with [wartime] trauma” is literally “I’ve never heard him discuss these events in any other cartoon.” You’ve also never seen him take a shit. What a load of phooey.


8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1


7. The Rugrats are just a figment of Angelica’s tortured imagination.


Goddamn, these people must think every Nickelodeon writers room was run by Franz Kafka. Apparently because Angelica has no real, meaningful connection with family or loved ones, she constructs younger, (literally) infantile playmates to belittle as an outlet for her rage. Thus, the babies are all actually dead or made up: Tommy died soon after childbirth, Chuckie died in the car crash which killed his mom, and Phil and Lil are Angelica’s bizarre imaginary reaction to the news of the their mother having a stillborn baby. Oof. Look. There are works of art that really do wrestle with this type of disturbing existential unrest, and then there are cartoons whose main character is a baby in a diaper named Tommy Pickles. And come on, is it not enough for you that there was an ACTUAL episode of this show which ended with Chuckie and his father literallyUNZIPPING THEIR SKIN, REVEALING THEMSELVES TO BE ALIENS, THEN TAKING OFF IN ASPACESHIP AND FLYING BACK TO THEIR HOME PLANET?? A MOMENT THAT WAS NEVERADDRESSED AGAIN?! Get your priorities straight, numbskulls. The Rugrats universe has bigger fish to fry.


8 Dark Theories About Childrens Movies and TV Shows - Image 1

8. Wall-E killed everyone on Planet Earth.


Yes. Our friend Wall-E, the adorable little robot with a conscience, went rogue, killed his friends, and slowly cannibalized everything around him for seven hundred years. Makes total sense. He had to do it to find love. At least he wasn’t a wimp like that guy in UP.

Cloned Photos!

Guys, this isn’t a photo album about clones like Dolly the sheep…it is a picture roll about famous pictures being recreated with Clone Troopers from Star Wars! Some of them are awesome, like Iwa Jima, Abby Road, Big Foot, and well, just all of them! Here are some amazing examples! You can find the full site here and see even more!

Realistic Pokemon Drawings!

DeviantArt-ist Arvalis has put together a pretty sizable collection of incredibly realistic Pokemon designs – with a trainer silhouette in each to show the sheer scale of these ‘mons. But one of the coolest parts of these designs is how other Pokemon are subtly worked into many of them (notice the Caterpie in the Charizard one below).

Incredible Pokemon Fan Art - Image 1
Incredible Pokemon Fan Art - Image 1
Incredible Pokemon Fan Art - Image 1
Incredible Pokemon Fan Art - Image 1
Incredible Pokemon Fan Art - Image 1